Trout

iTrader: (1)

David,

I think you missed the point. I am sure it is true that £23bn is around 2% of Government spend (although that is different from the statement in the originla post). My comment is pointed at the continued hysterical commentary which seems to have no connection to underlying facts.

The poster claims an exposure of up to £40bn. It is simply rubbish.

The number is speculative and it is not exposure. The money is secured against an underlying asset. That asset would have to devalue massively for there to be any exposure. There may be some transactional cost if NR goes bust but it will be comparatively tiny compared the BoE loan.

Suresh has got it spot on. When the Tories tried to bolster the pound they lost £10bn of our cash. LOST, not loaned or secured but LOST. This is a completely different situation.


On another note to perhaps bring a different perspective - if it had not been the BoE loaning the money it would have been (as it has been for the last decade) Barclays, HBoS, RBoS, Lloyds, UBS, etc, etc, stumping up our cash on deposit. However at that time you average wage earner was not worried that his salary in his current account being loaned out to NR to cover their mortgage book.

Leslie

You probably have a point Suresh, however, despite the fact that I have no traditional support for any party, I cannot help despising those who have dragged this once great country down to the gutter with a passion. Perhap's I should count to ten next time, but I won't withdraw from fair criticism.

Les

Trout

iTrader: (1)

Les,

can you explain how fulfilling a chartered and regulated role in preventing a loss of confidence right across the banking sector and cutting off a key mortgage stream into the domestic market - both of which would have a disastrous effect on the UK housing and financial markets is not in the public interest?

It could be I have missed something here, what is the fair criticism?

Rannoch

The Snug Rhino

This is what happens when the 9 o'clock news did away with the "and now something funny" item and introduced "and now the financial news"

Too many people with no idea misinterpreting the facts and adding their own agenda to what they have already become confused about in their own mind!

[Davey]

I think the figure is for a 'regular' income tax payer, I'm sure commercial tax payers are stumping up a much higher figure

GOLDMAN 555

We are talking about total public-sector exposure to the Rock of £40bn


Robert Peston, BBC business editor

BBC NEWS | Business | Rock expects £30bn loan this year

Told you so

lozgti

I just think everyone is missing the whole point.


Why is the goverment so concerned about one measly bank? (Rhetorical btw)